On 05/06/2014 12:52 AM, Martin Sperl wrote: > Out of curiosity: which features of c++11 do you want to use to > make gcc 4.8 an absolute requirement for the next major release? IMO, none. As Amos have mentioned, C++11 offers a few development convenience/safety features and some performance improvements, but none of them are an "absolute requirement for the next major release". FWIW, I was also surprised by the approaching C++11 requirement announcement. This is not my area of expertise, but I consider compiler requirements different from autoconf requirements that were also discussed on this thread. When it comes to autoconf, bootstrapping folks running on older machines (e.g., RHEL5) have a few acceptable options. For example, it is not very difficult to install the right autoconf/etc versions from sources locally and bootstrap Squid using them (in a user account on the same RHEL5 machine or elsewhere). This is annoying, but does not affect many admins, does not affect overall system operation, does not introduce a lot of unknowns, and does not conflict with most local policies. Installing a custom compiler version or cross-compiling is a much bigger problem on many levels IMHO. Cheers, Alex. > On 05/06/2014 05:17 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: >> Atomics for better/simpler SMP and to begin native threading of some >> components. Lambdas for better hashing, indexing algorithms ACLs etc. >> Move constructors for better performance across the board. Auto type >> deduction for simpler APIs on most of the complex template APIs. Each >> time we go diving into documentation for features we find something else. >> >> Some of these like move constructors are already being relied on for >> performance gains in 3.5 via the increased STL usage. There are other >> features which we have managed to write custom replacements for 3.3+ (ie >> nullptr and some of the atomics). However we expect to see small but >> measurable difference in speed between Squid binaries depending on the >> compiler version used to build it.
